Sexually selected behaviour: red squirrel males search for reproductive success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Differential male reproductive success is commonplace in mammals and frequently attributed to variation in morphological traits that provide individuals with a competitive advantage in female defence mating systems. Other mammalian mating systems, however, have received comparatively little attention and correlates of male reproductive success in them are less well understood. 2. We studied a free-ranging population of North American red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus Erxleben) exhibiting year-round individual territoriality. Males must temporarily vacate their territories to locate spatially dispersed receptive females, thereby setting the stage for a scramble competition mating system. 3. We predicted that both male annual mating success (measured as the number of females copulated with) and annual reproductive success (measured as the number of offspring sired) would be positively correlated with both search ability (measured as the number of oestrous females located over the mating season) and effort (measured as mating season home range size), generating directional sexual selection on these two metrics. 4. Mating season home ranges of males showed, on average, an almost 10-fold increase relative to those measured during the nonmating season, while those of females showed a more moderate twofold increase and both annual mating and reproductive success of males was positively correlated with search ability and search effort. 5. The spatial dispersion of females, resulting from the strict territorial social structure of red squirrels, gave rise to a predicted scramble competition mating system. Furthermore, the strength of sexual selection on behavioural traits in this mating system equalled previous estimates for morphological traits in female defence mating systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".